So the '81-82 recession, which started 6 months into the Reagan administration, was Carter's fault? Or the 2001 recession, which begin under W's watch. Might as well blame Clinton for 9/11 while you're at it.

Well, Harding was as corrupt as the day is long, Andrew Johnson was a barely-literate punching bag of the bloodthirsty post-war northern Congress bent on revenge, Buchanan's inactions did more to hand us the Civil War than any other, and Pierce's son died gruesomely in front of him just before inauguration, so he crawled into a bottle and spent his entire administration there. I'm no fan of Bush, but due to these four, he'll never be worse than number five on the Awful Presidents list.

I just watched his speech in it's entirety. He is the most dynamic speaker I've ever seen. Knowing full well that the top 1% in the World are the ones who are really in control of our government, I would still vote for this guy right now to lead our country. As it stands, I'm having a hard time voting for either one of the guys who are running right now.

It's amazing -- you are at your most moderate when the situation is at its most hypothetical.

Assuming you're old enough, you probably hated Clinton at the time and thought he was trying to destroy America, much like you think Obama is now.

You look back now, far removed from those hyperbolic emotions, and you're like "you know... Clinton wasn't that bad. He was a liberal we conservatives could talk to, unlike this dickbag."

History's repeating itself. You have a liberal in office with a proven track record of cooperation and willingness to accept ideas from both sides of the aisle, a centrist presidency that, once again, the GOP has successfully convinced itself is trying to destroy America with socialist policies (el oh el).

If Obama wins reelection, and the unemployment numbers fall like they're supposed to in 2014, you'll look back on his Presidency in 2024 when you're hating on some new Democratic President that you're certain is trying to destroy America and you're going to say "that Obama... he wasn't so bad. He was a liberal we conservatives could talk to, unlike this dickbag."

If the people of the this country elects a POTUS and one political party absolutely REFUSES to compromise in order to better this country, those involved, whether R or D, should be thrown out on their asses.

We did, they did, they weren't. Whether we like it or not this is the reality. Nobody will work with obama. He has to go.

It's amazing -- you are at your most moderate when the situation is at its most hypothetical.

Assuming you're old enough, you probably hated Clinton at the time and thought he was trying to destroy America, much like you think Obama is now.

You look back now, far removed from those hyperbolic emotions, and you're like "you know... Clinton wasn't that bad. He was a liberal we conservatives could talk to, unlike this dickbag."

History's repeating itself. You have a liberal in office with a proven track record of cooperation and willingness to accept ideas from both sides of the aisle, a centrist presidency that, once again, the GOP has successfully convinced itself is trying to destroy America with socialist policies (el oh el).

If Obama wins reelection, and the unemployment numbers fall like they're supposed to in 2014, you'll look back on his Presidency in 2024 when you're hating on some new Democratic President that you're certain is trying to destroy America and you're going to say "that Obama... he wasn't so bad. He was a liberal we conservatives could talk to, unlike this dickbag."

Break the cycle, RINGLEADER. Break the cycle.

Centrist president.

You don't REALLY believe that, do you?

__________________I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?

It's amazing -- you are at your most moderate when the situation is at its most hypothetical.

Assuming you're old enough, you probably hated Clinton at the time and thought he was trying to destroy America, much like you think Obama is now.

You look back now, far removed from those hyperbolic emotions, and you're like "you know... Clinton wasn't that bad. He was a liberal we conservatives could talk to, unlike this dickbag."

History's repeating itself. You have a liberal in office with a proven track record of cooperation and willingness to accept ideas from both sides of the aisle, a centrist presidency that, once again, the GOP has successfully convinced itself is trying to destroy America with socialist policies (el oh el).

If Obama wins reelection, and the unemployment numbers fall like they're supposed to in 2014, you'll look back on his Presidency in 2024 when you're hating on some new Democratic President that you're certain is trying to destroy America and you're going to say "that Obama... he wasn't so bad. He was a liberal we conservatives could talk to, unlike this dickbag."

Break the cycle, RINGLEADER. Break the cycle.

Yeah good old Willie! Other than being a serial rapist he was a great guy. The good old days. Heck back then if you were caught having an affair with a homely, overweight half wit you could just bomb a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, or some "training camps" in Afghanistan and if necessary good Iraq to distract the public~

__________________“With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion"
Steven Weinberg~

With the president taking charge, though, Obama found that he had little history with members of Congress to draw on. His administration's early decision to forego bipartisanship for the sake of speed around the stimulus bill was encapsulated by his then-chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel: "We have the votes. F--- 'em," he's quoted in the book as saying.

That seems to be in keeping with other quotes I've seen on Rahm.

__________________
"I love signature blocks on the Internet. I get to put whatever the hell I want in quotes, pick a pretend author, and bang, it's like he really said it." George Washington